Face Aftereffects and the Perceptual Underpinnings of Gender-Related Biases
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General © 2013 American Psychological Association 2014, Vol. 143, No. 3, 1259–1276 0096-3445/14/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0034516 Recalibrating Gender Perception: Face Aftereffects and the Perceptual Underpinnings of Gender-Related Biases David J. Lick and Kerri L. Johnson University of California, Los Angeles Contemporary perceivers encounter highly gendered imagery in media, social networks, and the work- place. Perceivers also express strong interpersonal biases related to targets’ gendered appearances after mere glimpses at their faces. In the current studies, we explored adaptation to gendered facial features as a perceptual mechanism underlying these biases. In Study 1, brief visual exposure to highly gendered exemplars shifted perceptual norms for men’s and women’s faces. Studies 2–4 revealed that changes in perceptual norms were accompanied by notable shifts in social evaluations. Specifically, exposure to feminine phenotypes exacerbated biases against hypermasculine faces, whereas exposure to masculine phenotypes mitigated them. These findings replicated across multiple independent samples with diverse stimulus sets and outcome measures, revealing that perceptual gender norms are calibrated on the basis of recent visual encounters, with notable implications for downstream evaluations of others. As such, visual adaptation is a useful tool for understanding and altering social biases related to gendered facial features. Keywords: visual aftereffects, face perception, social vision, gender bias, gendered phenotypes In daily life, people encounter others who vary considerably in included many men with visibly feminized facial features (high their gendered appearance (i.e., masculinity/femininity). Although brow line, high cheekbones, wide eyes, small nose; e.g., Max many individuals fall within the average range of gender variation, Greenfield, Matt Bomer, Damian Lewis, Paul Rudd, Usher, Aaron others do not. In fact, self-presentational motives and strategic Paul, Ian Somerhalder). Individuals’ everyday self-presentations editing practices ensure that the people we see in print, onscreen, also favor feminized phenotypes, insofar as both men and women or in daily life are often exceptionally gendered. One might expect undergo cosmetic surgery to accentuate feminine aspects of their that such gendered imagery would exaggerate sexually dimorphic facial appearance, such as small noses and lifted eyelids (Davis, features (i.e., exceptionally feminine women and masculine men), 2002). Taken together, these factors produce an overrepresentation but that is not the case. Instead, a systematic feminization is of feminine phenotypes relative to more masculine phenotypes in evident across visual domains. At least in Western countries, media and social life. female actresses, reporters, politicians, and models tend to embody Such highly gendered imagery is likely to shape our preferences hyperfeminine features (Carpinella & Johnson, 2013; Carter & for and judgments of other people. Indeed, gendered facial features Steiner, 2004; Collins, 2011; Heldman & Wade, 2011). Perhaps predict biased impressions of men and women, with perceivers surprisingly, the same is true among Western men: Visual media expressing distaste for exceedingly masculine features in both rarely depict men who are hypermasculine, but increasingly depict sexes (Frederick & Haselton, 2007; Little & Perrett, 2011; Sc- men who are somewhat feminized (Adams, 2011; E. Anderson, zensy, Spreeman, & Stahlberg, 2006). We contend that frequent 2005, 2008, 2009; Coad, 2008). Anecdotal evidence corroborates visual exposure to feminine phenotypes, or infrequent exposure to these empirical observations. For example, People Magazine’s list more masculine phenotypes, may perpetuate these gender-related of the most prominent and attractive male celebrities of 2012 biases. Consistent with this possibility, empirical evidence sug- gests that visual exposure to faces helps to calibrate what is This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. perceived as normative and that shifts in perceptual norms may This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. influence subsequent social evaluations. For example, when per- This article was published Online First September 30, 2013. ceivers adapt to caricatured faces, features of those faces begin to David J. Lick, Department of Psychology, University of California, Los appear normative (Rhodes, Robbins, et al., 2005). Subsequent Angeles; Kerri L. Johnson, Department of Psychology and Department of faces that violate this norm (i.e., anticaricatures) tend to be eval- Communication Studies, University of California, Los Angeles. uated negatively, a shift in judgment known as an aftereffect This research was supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate (Principe & Langlois, 2012; Rhodes, Jeffery, Watson, Clifford, & Research Fellowship and Janet Hyde Graduate Student Research Grant Nakayama, 2003). Although compelling, evidence of this link (David J. Lick) as well as by National Science Foundation Grant BCS- between visual adaptation and social evaluation has been limited 1052896 (Kerri L. Johnson). We thank Jon Freeman for stimuli and members of the Social Communication Lab for assistance with data col- primarily to caricatured features and ratings of attractiveness. lection. Whether and how visual adaptation to naturally varying pheno- Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David J. types affects broader social evaluations remains less clear. Lick, UCLA Department of Psychology, 1285 Franz Hall, Box 951563, Here, we argue that visual adaptation to highly gendered phe- Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563. E-mail: [email protected] notypes influences gender-related biases in social perception. Spe- 1259 1260 LICK AND JOHNSON cifically, we propose that people evaluate others on the basis of when those features become extreme (Rhodes, 2006; Rhodes et al., perceived norms for sex categories, such that targets whose gen- 2000). This may lead to more favorable evaluations of feminine dered appearances lie far from the norm are evaluated negatively. men relative to more masculine men. In line with this reasoning, Furthermore, we propose that these norms are malleable and that one study noted a curvilinear association between masculine ap- they are calibrated on the basis of the faces that observers have pearance and ratings of male attractiveness, such that women recently encountered in their environment. If our hypotheses are perceived masculine body shapes to be maximally attractive to a correct, then visual adaptation may be a proximal mechanism point, after which additional musculature was perceived as unat- underlying gender-related biases that arise in the early stages of tractive, perhaps due to its association with excessive strength social perception, and it may provide a novel tool for understand- (Frederick & Haselton, 2007). In other work, experimental admin- ing and eventually mitigating those biases. istration of oxytocin masked observers’ feelings of threat when viewing hypermasculine faces. This led observers who received Gender-Related Biases in Social Perception oxytocin to prefer more masculine faces relative to observers who did not receive oxytocin (Theodoridou, Rowe, Rogers, & Penton- People readily form impressions of others on the basis of mere Voak, 2011). Collectively, these findings suggest that social eval- glimpses of their faces (Willis & Todorov, 2006), and they often uations may be biased toward feminine men and women due to exploit gendered information to do so (Freeman, Johnson, Am- perceivers’ stereotypically positive associations with femininity bady, & Rule, 2010; Keating, 1985). Indeed, social evaluations and negative associations with masculinity. Although this expla- based on gendered appearance cues begin within milliseconds of nation is certainly reasonable, other factors may also be at play. In visual exposure (Ito & Cacioppo, 2000; Ito, Thompson, & Ca- particular, we propose that perceptual experience may contribute cioppo, 2004), and they carry implications for a wide range of to gender-related biases in social evaluation. social evaluations. For example, gendered features guide attrac- tiveness judgments (Johnston & Franklin, 1993; Rhodes, Hickford, Perceptual Experience, Gender Norms, & Jeffery, 2000). This results in a pronounced bias favoring and Evaluative Biases feminine women: Across cultures, feminine female faces (i.e., those with a rounder jaw, wider eyes, higher brow line, higher Biases against hypermasculine men and women may occur in cheekbones, smaller nose) are consistently rated as more attractive part because perceivers have limited visual exposure to such than masculine female faces (Jones & Hill, 1993; Perrett et al., targets. Indeed, the women portrayed in popular media, politics, 1998; Perrett, May, & Yoshikawa, 1994; Rhodes et al., 2000; video games, and social networks tend to be more feminine than Valenzano, Mennucci, Tartarelli, & Cellerino, 2006). Gendered masculine (Carpinella & Johnson, 2013; Manago, Graham, Green- appearance cues also bias judgments of men’s attractiveness, field, & Salimkhan, 2008). A similar trend exists for men: Whereas though the direction of the effect is somewhat less clear. In some portrayals of hypermasculine men are rare, portrayals of more studies, perceivers judge masculine